robxorb

This seems off. Sufficient liquidity in a market isn't natively a binary state. That state would be imposed by the programmer with a threshold. Hardcoding only two assets would surely miss dynamic opportunities in others.

Anyone looking for an idea for something potentially valuable to make: ingest PDF datasheets and let us search/compare etc, across them. The PDF datasheet is possibly one of the biggest and most unecessary hurdles to electronics design efficiency.

My guess is because when you make it so stupidly obvious it's unbelievable, people will respond exactly like you have, ask exactly your questions, and end up convinced it's not true. Ad hominem doesn't help (as much as I may agree!).

The fact remains that these people the guy found look extremely similar, but correctly aged and have the same names. If it's not indicative of some bizarre conspiracy, it's still extremely weird a coincidence.

I'd have hoped someone could calculate some odds based on names and looks or something and make it make sense.

I have no idea what to make of this, does anyone have further information? Faces match, some careers match, logo is insane:

https://rumble.com/v4wxpje-challenger-astronauts-alive-deman...

> OTH radars are almost all fixed

Given their strategic advantage, you can bet the military will have prioritised steerable.

I disagree with the general premise regarding global coverage. With the US military, capabilities, especially in surveillance, have historically been shown to be decades ahead of what the public thinks is possible.

Personally, if a post appeared tomorrow showing some HN had figured out how to trace the movements of any airliner, without using its adsb and relying instead on anything and everything else that's publicly available, from satellite imagery, to radio frequency data, to radar, even weather data (contrails are often detectable), it would seem cool, sure - but, not unbelievable.

That hypothetically believable scenario would be one person, with no budget, in likely a few weeks or months of their spare time.

The US military has trillions of dollars, the best talent in the world, and decades of dedicated effort in exactly this area, and a propensity to keep such advances secret for decades (as shown recently enough by the Trump photo).

Good points but neither of them rule out being reconfigured and used in an emergency, potential hijack situation to locate what could be a significant security threat. Airliners were used for the biggest attack on US ground since WW2. Priority number one.

The presumed flight path at the time it went missing is perhaps relevant, and that was within the vicinity of Diego Garcia, as the flights last few known turns were heading toward it. It seems odd the US would not care nor have tracking ability.

I've seen analysis that showed the flight was within range of several over-the-horizon radars at the time of disappearance and for hours after, ie - someone should know more than we do. As often with such things, I can't find it again.

As is often the case almost anywhere in the world, there's a major US military base nearby. In this case it's Diego Garcia, and is absolutely huge:

https://veteranlife.com/military-history/diego-garcia/

"The base is home to thousands of American troops, sophisticated radar, space tracking, and a communications facility."

This kind of makes sense, but to me, in a post-9/11 world, the US military would definitely be scrambling whatever they have to track a rogue airliner that's gone completely dark, yet is still verifiably flying (sat pings).

For anyone interested in the rotary encoder part, and how they work, I found this 7min explainer getting right into the details:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=S2BfGMqe3kQ

If 16cm through clouds and rain has been publicly available for three years, what does military have and for how long? And with that capability, and in a post-9/11 world, how could an entire rogue airliner not be traced to within sqm's of impact/landing?

Surely some random HN commenter is not going to become aware of whether you do or do not follow their suggestion on meditation?

Why let them - or rather, allow your imagination of them - have power over your future choices?

What are the XT and NT architectures in this context? I couldn't find clear reaults when searching.

How does one compile this?

EDIT: my bad, my source had a typo - it's as easy as you'd think:

  $ cc hello.c -o hello
  $ ./hello

Thanks, that all makes a lot of sense.

As to why it felt off: identical patterns across as-yet unconnected distributions is usually an early indicator of undiscovered relation.

Your suggestion of language steering toward open syllables may well be that relationship.

Why would the earths rotation be more significant influence on particles versus its orbit or the solar systems movement around the galactic core, the galaxy's movement, etc? Or do they all, but are unaccounted for in this experiment maybe?

The article seems to say it's random chance, based upon one linguists opinion. Doesn't at all feel right statistically. Seems more likely there would be some kind of missing link. Could someone better informed possibly figure out the odds?

Mobile?

Search on Rumble/bitchute for the Senator Ron Johnson hearing featuring vaccine-injured from the original Pfizer vaccine trial, whose injuries were then excluded from the trial results despite clearly having been caused by the vaccine.

Considering how limited the trials were, it's difficult to conclude the wider number would be vanishingly small, given even just one or two incorrect exclusions of vaccine-caused injury, which could reasonably happen even by chance.

Given the context that Pfizer has been repeatedly tried and criminally convicted for highly unethical practices and fined in the billions for it - along with the rest of big-pharma - it's unfair to regard the suspicious as "fucking idiots".

Certainly, the characterisation offends me, as I personally know multiple people who were definitely injured directly by the COVID vaccine, of every major variety: Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, and Moderna.

Statistically, that should simply not be the case, were these "mRNA" injections as safe as they were marketed to be.

Not familiar with flycut, but had a look through their issues. There are a few security-related, and a bunch of iCloud stuff. Eg, this one to add the option to disable iCloud sync, which is still open after 4 years:

https://github.com/TermiT/Flycut/issues/200

From that it seems clipbook may be better for people who care about local-only or have other security-related concerns (perhaps related to workplace policy, for example). Maybe someone who knows more could weigh in?

That's pretty much how I imagined it working.

Was news to me to read in a sibling that it also requires mental stimulation. I thought it was purely a physical inducement by the drug, as many drugs for other purposes induce a physical response without requiring mental effort.

A well-balanced comparison is well overdue, considering the amounts of one-sided coverage recently. Is it indicative of an issue with Boeing? Or with media reporting? Probably the former, but it's something we should really be more sure of.

Well, here's the only solid thing with referenced figures that came up. Chart on page one is quite the ride, as I'd have expected for early science:

https://21sci-tech.com/Subscriptions/Spring%202008%20ONLINE/...

Everything else I found was unfortunately hand-wavy "scientific consensus says" and the ubiquitous "280ppm" coupled with "pre-industrial" repeated again without reference, nor apparent empirical basis.

Not convincing, which for "the science is settled" I'd expect a bit of a higher standard.

How do they choose people for these surveys? And can 24k people from 32 countries (so, 750 in each) be representative of 8 billion in 200+ countries? I know only a minority locally who could support a plastics ban, due to low awareness.

Certainly a guesstimate in other countries I can think of who are likely responsible for high plastics pollution, would be far lower than 8 or 9 out of every 10 people, as it's a contributor as to why the issue exists in those places, surely?

Thanks, though that study makes no mention of CO2, and concerns instead oxygen from 500m, to 1b years ago, which seems a little far off to be applicable to the order of the around one hundred and fifty years ago being asked about. Have I missed something?

How did we measure CO2 accurately pre-industry? Isn't the rise of industry kind of coincident with the ability to measure gases accurately? And if the trend as accuracy increased was up, wouldn't it suggest initial underestimates?

Or is there some reliable way we can measure in retrospect?

Probably because only you and I have a problem with it ;)

That does help, thanks! Very intuitive analogy. Maybe this kind of organisational structure is a kind of natural archetype people gravitate towards when coming together to break new ground.

I've read it in several places over the years, and just had a search now to find a reference to cite. Here's a PubMed paper on the subject:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3010799/

(And note how points 1 through 4 all quite conflict with each other!)

Thank you, that makes my apparently half-formed prior understanding make a lot more sense. Seems the path forward is researching the greater context of the last authors work, and of course the common convention for each field.

Eg, as a sibling commented this convention may not be common in ML research, I wonder then if it may be something less common in emergent fields where researchers are generally be younger and less likely to follow older traditions.